Spatial arrangement of action-oriented versus hybrid agri-environmental schemes: implications for the optimisation of grassland ecosystem services

CONTEXT: The potential of agri-environmental schemes to create synergies among biodiversity conservation and further ecosystem services while accounting for the trade-off with food production is still widely overlooked. OBJECTIVE: This paper provides a methodological framework to improve the effectiveness of agri-environmental schemes in permanent grasslands at the regional level. METHODS: The framework comprises three steps that integrate existing approaches to provide decision-makers with a structured and systematic approach for holistic assessments of ecosystem service and guide the spatial targeting of agri-environmental schemes. Step 1 focusses on better understanding the current system and in particular of how agri-environmental measures co-vary with environmental characteristics that are relevant for agricultural production, biodiversity, and further ecosystem services. Step 2 assesses spatial (mis)matches between the current allocation of agri-environmental schemes and ecosystem services hot- and cold-spots. Step 3 focuses on reducing mismatches through a reallocation of agri-environmental schemes. We illustrated our framework in the canton of Solothurn, Switzerland, to examine how environmental conditions for differently designed agri-environmental schemes (action-based vs. hybrid) and spatial heterogeneity can support synergies between biodiversity and two regulating ecosystem services (climate regulation and pollination) and reduce trade-offs with forage production at the regional level. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Our stepwise framework provides a guideline to assess and improve the effectiveness of agri-environmental schemes in grasslands. Each step is methodologically flexible and can be adapted to specific contexts, including the selection of ecosystem services, appropriate indicators, and modelling approaches. In our case study, extensive grasslands, especially those in hybrid schemes, were predominantly situated on marginal lands, when compared to intensively managed grasslands. Over 90 % of pastures (grazed grasslands) under each of the two agri-environmental schemes overlapped with hotspots of regulating services. Around 15 % of meadows (mown), under each of the two agri-environmental schemes, overlapped with yield hotspots, resulting in considerable trade-offs with food production. 34 % of the grassland area could be set aside for biodiversity conservation instead of being used for (intensive) forage production, as it was located in potential hotspots of regulating ecosystem services and on potential yield coldspots. Pastures under agri-environmental schemes generally showed a better fit with yield coldspots and regulating ecosystem services hotspots than respective meadows. Spatial targeting reduced trade-offs in some cases, but it did not eliminate them, as the focus on specific services reflected local geographical constraints. SIGNIFICANCE: Our stepwise framework offers insights for the spatial planning of agri-environmental schemes at the regional scale. It serves as a practical tool for spatial planners and decision-makers to enhance the efficiency of environmental management interventions, by supporting the supply of multiple ecosystem services while minimizing trade-offs with agricultural production. The application of the framework suggests that spatial targeting of biodiversity conservation schemes could enhance their effectiveness and reduce trade-offs between regulating and provisioning ecosystem services at the regional scale. Effective reallocation of the schemes should be grounded in environmental contexts that also promote high biodiversity.